Has anyone with a LOWERED car had an alignment done lately? If so, can you share your numbers, please? I have tons of negative camber, and the shop is saying its because its lowered, and that's the most adjustability there is..... Thanks!

 

Not a recent setup, but here's the Dealer settings after fitting Eibach lowering springs (-15mm front, -25mm rear) to my 2018 V6 2WD R-Dynamic. This was as close to optimum they could get with the ride height drop. There is no camber adjustment on the rear, only the front. Obviously a more aggressive drop, i.e. the H&R springs, will result in even more negative camber.

 

Thanks, I want to go Eibach route too, so basically even with Eibachs they managed to get everything in borderline tolerance (=green)?

 

@J444G Yes, all wheel alignment settings were within the upper/lower tolerances (as shown on print). The lowest 'step' on the graphic is optimum. The second 'step' is acceptable. The third 'step' indicates outside tolerances. So fitting the Eibachs to a V6 should keep you in the acceptable range once adjustments (where available) have been made.

 

Also remember the green is just a measurement of +/- from the factory specification. Being outside factory isn't necessarily bad, it just depends on goals.

 

How much camber is "tons of camber"? With my H&R springs (lowest I know of other than coils) I get something like -2.5 in the rear, natural camber curve. No adjustment in the rear. I don't have the stats with me, but front camber is adjustable and I set it to around -2 with a little bit of toe out. Not stock settings mind you but I wouldn't be afraid of a little negative camber.

 

Thanks! I DO have the H&R's and am at 2.5 and 2.4 for front camber. I've been lowered for a couple of years, and just replaced my front tires due to excessive wear on the insides. Just trying to decide if 2.4/2.5 is as good as it gets, or should I go to another shop, and/or find some kind of "hardware" solution to "decrease?" the negative camber.

 

I have the H&R's myself, and am sitting at 2.5 and 2.4 for the fronts. Just didn't know if that was what it was, or if there was enough adjustment to make is better. (ie. go to a different shop, etc....) Thx.

 

@Doug5.0 Given that the Eibach springs are a relatively mild drop compared to the H&R springs and my car is only just within Jag specs, I suspect the range of adjustment on the eccentric lower suspension arm mount doesn't provide enough offset to counter the change in geometry caused by the H&R springs. You could try another shop, but I suspect 2.4/2.5 is best you will get, given the fairly aggressive drop of the H&Rs. In terms of 'hardware' solution, you would have to find a shorter lower suspension arm (and probably matching track control arm) - unlikely as the F-Type is fitted with double wishbone all round and no other Jag models use anything similar. Alternatively, you could fit adjustable camber plates to the suspension strut top mount, although I suspect these would have to be custom made as I have never seen anything on the market in the 5 years of 'tinkering' with my own F-Type. If you prefer the H&R ride height and don't want to change to a less aggressive drop, I think you'll just have to live with the fact the inner edges of your front tyres are going to have a hard life.

 

@genp729 Thanks! That's exactly what I was trying to figure out. I had been told by some others "elsewhere" that the 2+ was ridiculous and I just had a bad shop. Thanks!

 

Not that big of a difference between H&R and Eibach height, and the front camber curve isn't *that* aggresive. You should be able to get somewhere around -2 on the fronts, but not in factory spec for sure.

if you're getting excessive wear on the inside at around -2 camber, you may want to check your toe - toe will wear things much faster.

Dug up my specs:
Front - Toe 0.15, R camber -2.2, L camber - 2.2, caster 7.5
Rear: Toe 0.15, R camber -2.5 L camber -2.4

No major wear problem on the inside of the tire - probably wears a bit more but nothing that stands out (caveat, I don't put massive highway miles on my car, I'm more of a back roads burner).

What toe at front and rear did you end up at?

 

[QUOTE=bfrank1972;2848835]

Dug up my specs:
Front - Toe 0.15, R camber -2.2, L camber - 2.2, caster 7.5
Rear: Toe 0.15, R camber -2.5 L camber -2.4

/QUOTE]

Front - L toe .11, L caster 7.2, and L camber -2.5; R toe .08 (total .19) R caster 7.5, and R camber -2.4
Back - L toe .14, L camber -2.2; R toe .16 (total .29) and R camber -2.6

Thanks!

 

Hmmm those alignment settings don't look too bad - are those the original settings or were those recent readings? Was the wear the same for all 4 tires? Also what tires did you run and what was pressure did you keep them at?